Sohel Sheikh and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra

Sohel Sheikh and Another vs State of Maharashtra

Type Court Judgment Court Mumbai Nagpur Decided Apr 18, 2013

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1104788

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1104788
Court: Mumbai Nagpur High Court
Judge: M.L. Tahaliyani
Decided On: Apr 18, 2013
Case Number: Criminal Revision Application No.204 of 2011
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sohel Sheikh and Another

Respondent

State of Maharashtra

Excerpt

.....since all the panch witnesses were hostile, the evidence of the investigating officer should have been examined with great caution and care. the learned appellate court, however, after hearing the appellants and the state, dismissed the appeal. the learned counsel mr. j.m. gandhi appearing on behalf of both the applicants has submitted that in fact the learned trial court and the appellate court have committed gross error in appreciating the evidence. during the course of further hearing, the learned counsel mr. gandhi has submitted that the applicants are in custody since 28.1.2008. and they have completed more than five years. he, therefore, prayed that the sentence may be reduced to the period already undergone by them. 4. considering the sentence of imprisonment imposed on them and also considering the fact that they have completed five years and further considering the remission which might be available to them, i am of the view that a case is made out for reduction of substantive sentence. the learned addl.p.p. mr. doiphode has submitted that this court after taking into consideration the nature of evidence and the period already undergone by the applicants, may pass suitable order. 5. after hearing both sides, i pass the following order:- the revision application is partly allowed. the judgment passed by the learned addl. sessions judge, nagpur in criminal appeal no.51/2009 is modified. the conviction of the applicants for the offence punishable under section 489-b r/ws. 34 of ipc and sec. 489-c r/ws. 34 ipc is maintained. as far as the substantive sentence is concerned, the same is reduced to the period already undergone by the applicants. it is stated that fine amount has been paid by both the applicants. the applicants be released from the prison if they are not required in any other case and if the fine amount is paid. application stands disposed off.

Full Judgment

Oral Judgment:

Heard Mr. J.M. Gandhi, learned Advocate for the applicants and Mr.S.S. Doiphode, learned Addl. P.P. for the respondent-State.

2. This Revision impugns the judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Criminal Appeal No.51/2009 of Nagpur District. The said Appeal was filed against the judgment and order passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge in Sessions Trial No.237/2008 on 7th March, 2009. Both the applicants were convicted for the offences punishable under section 489-B read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 489-C read with sec. 34 of the IPC. They have been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each, on each of the count. Both the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

3. It was contended before the Appellate Court that since all the Panch witnesses were hostile, the evidence of the Investigating Officer should have been examined with great caution and care. The learned Appellate Court, however, after hearing the appellants and the State, dismissed the Appeal. The learned counsel Mr. J.M. Gandhi appearing on behalf of both the applicants has submitted that in fact the learned trial Court and the Appellate Court have committed gross error in appreciating the evidence. During the course of further hearing, the learned counsel Mr. Gandhi has submitted that the applicants are in custody since 28.1.2008. and they have completed more than five years. He, therefore, prayed that the sentence may be reduced to the period already undergone by them.

4. Considering the sentence of imprisonment imposed on them and also considering the fact that they have completed five years and further considering the remission which might be available to them, I am of the view that a case is made out for reduction of substantive sentence. The learned Addl.P.P. Mr. Doiphode has submitted that this Court after taking into consideration the nature of evidence and the period already undergone by the applicants, may pass suitable order.

5. After hearing both sides, I pass the following order:-

The Revision Application is partly allowed. The judgment passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Criminal Appeal No.51/2009 is modified. The conviction of the applicants for the offence punishable under section 489-B r/ws. 34 of IPC and Sec. 489-C r/ws. 34 IPC is maintained. As far as the substantive sentence is concerned, the same is reduced to the period already undergone by the applicants. It is stated that fine amount has been paid by both the applicants. The applicants be released from the prison if they are not required in any other case and if the fine amount is paid.

Application stands disposed off.

Same Court & Year Mumbai Nagpur · 2013 Same Parties Sohel Sheikh and Another vs State of Maharashtra Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge M.L. Tahaliyani